Re: Intent to unship: navigator.registerContentHandler()

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Daniel Veditz wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Tantek Çelik > wrote: >> >> Also good methodology worth repeating: >>"thinking ... through all the way up to and including the user >> experience, makes for

Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation: WOFF 2.0

Yes we are an implementer. WOFF 2.0 was enabled in Firefox 39, released 2015-06-30. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1084026 and https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@font-face#Browser_compatibility Kevin Brosnan On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:40 AM, L. David Baron

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:10:35PM -0800, Bobby Holley wrote: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Kris Maglione wrote: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 05:12:37PM +0100, Tom Schuster wrote: This could be an issue for WebExtensions as well. I think the contentscript sandbox runs in

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 05:12:37PM +0100, Tom Schuster wrote: This could be an issue for WebExtensions as well. I think the contentscript sandbox runs in a different compartment. It runs in a different compartment, but the DOM constructors it has access to come from the same content window as

Re: Device Orientation API future

> > Specifically: I was wondering about the real impact of the webvr polyfill > > not working, on Firefox users. My mention of the work implementing WebVR > > was pointing out that we will hopefully not need to worry about the > > webvr-polyfil working on Gecko-based browsers in the

Re: Device Orientation API future

> Specifically: I was wondering about the real impact of the webvr polyfill not working, on Firefox users. My mention of the work implementing WebVR was pointing out that we will hopefully not need to worry about the webvr-polyfil working on Gecko-based browsers in the not-to-distant future,

Re: Intent to unship: navigator.registerContentHandler()

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote: > Also good methodology worth repeating: >"thinking ... through all the way up to and including the user > ​​ > experience, makes for a much more viable approach" > ​Including, of course, "how will 4chan trolls

W3C Proposed Recommendation: WOFF 2.0

A W3C Proposed Recommendation is available for the membership of W3C (including Mozilla) to vote on, before it proceeds to the final stage of being a W3C Recomendation: WOFF (Web Open Font Format) File Format 2.0 https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF2/ https://w3c.github.io/woff/woff2/ Deadline for

Re: Device Orientation API future

Oh, I see what you are saying. I think there is some confusion here (perhaps on my part only). I do not know if the main use of (and motivation for) the sensor APIs is webvr, but I have not been involved in it. I thought that (newer) API was brought up in this discussion as a suggestion for

Re: Device Orientation API future

I don’t understand this comment. > On Jan 11, 2018, at 12:50 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > > As Anne said, I don't know why you would define a new API rather than > enhancing the existing one, other than NIH. But I guess the damage is > now done. > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at

Re: Device Orientation API future

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:48 PM, Blair MacIntyre wrote: >> In that case I'm not entirely sure why we'd also pursue new >> variants separately. > > I’m not sure what this means? That if our main usage for the new sensor APIs (those discussed in

Re: Device Orientation API future

As Anne said, I don't know why you would define a new API rather than enhancing the existing one, other than NIH. But I guess the damage is now done. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 4:48 AM, Blair MacIntyre wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Blair MacIntyre

Re: Device Orientation API future

> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Blair MacIntyre > wrote: >> First, this discussion pertains to FF on Windows, Mac, Android and Linux, I >> assume? FF for iOS just uses the wkWebView and it’s up to Apple to decide >> on things like this. Is this correct? > > I

Re: Device Orientation API future

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Blair MacIntyre wrote: > First, this discussion pertains to FF on Windows, Mac, Android and Linux, I > assume? FF for iOS just uses the wkWebView and it’s up to Apple to decide on > things like this. Is this correct? I believe there's

PSA: If you're trying to run Nightly with WebRender enabled, you will have to change some preferences...

As of the latest nightly, you just need gfx.webrender.all set to true.  You can leave the other preferences ( gfx.webrender.enabled, gfx.webrender.blob-images, image.mem.shared, layers.acceleration.force-enabled, which are still meaningfull for developers) as default. -- - Milan

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

IIRC Blink uses a different mechanism (called "separate worlds") to allow extensions to interact with content, whereas we use a separate global + xrays. So this likely will be a problem for WebExtensions, and we'll presumably need a sandboxOption to opt into the old behavior. On Thu, Jan 11, 2018

Re: JS modules are now enabled in nightly

On 1/11/18 1:44 AM, Jon Coppeard wrote: Just a heads up: JS module scripts

Re: Intent to Implement: canvas-imagedata permission

On 10/01/18 18:40, Tom Ritter wrote: > This proposal is that. Add a permission 'canvas-imagedata' that will > return 'granted' when Resist Fingerprinting mode is disabled, and > 'prompt' when RP is enabled and appropriate. As this is basically a "is RF turned on?" flag, why not just call it that?

Re: Device Orientation API future

I’ve been thinking about this since my last message, and I wanted to step back and clarify something for myself. First, this discussion pertains to FF on Windows, Mac, Android and Linux, I assume? FF for iOS just uses the wkWebView and it’s up to Apple to decide on things like this. Is this

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

Based on what Cameron wrote, other browsers already return false if things get mixed, so hopefully the WebExtensions side of the problem is still limited? ~ Gijs On 11/01/2018 16:12, Tom Schuster wrote: This could be an issue for WebExtensions as well. I think the contentscript sandbox runs

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

This could be an issue for WebExtensions as well. I think the contentscript sandbox runs in a different compartment. On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: > On 11/01/2018 05:29, Cameron McCormack wrote: > >> For use in the meantime, I just landed bug

Re: performing cross-context instanceof checks

On 11/01/2018 05:29, Cameron McCormack wrote: For use in the meantime, I just landed bug 1428531 on inbound, which adds a new chrome-only static method "isInstance" to Web IDL defined interfaces, so you can write for example: Document.isInstance(otherWindow.document) So that we don't have

Re: Device Orientation API future

We have three categories of solutions suggested here: - Throttling - An explicit gesture to approve using the API - A prompt We might be able to do some/all of those depending on the situation. Is there anything else I have missed that has been suggested? I honestly would like to request we do

JS modules are now enabled in nightly

Just a heads up: JS module scripts